Fear of John McCain
Harold Meyerson is afraid of John McCain:
McCain on the Red Phone: It is 3 a.m., and the stillness of the White House night is shattered by the ringing of the red phone. President John McCain, rousing himself from a deep sleep, turns on the light and picks up the receiver. A U.S. embassy in a Middle Eastern country, he is told, has been blown up, and al-Qaeda is taking credit. McCain takes a deep breath. "Character counts, my friend," he says. "Bomb Iran. Bomb, bomb Iran."
There is a rustling of blankets, and, brushing aside Cindy McCain, a concerned Joe Lieberman rises from the bed. "Not Iran, Mr. President," he says. "They hate al-Qaeda."
"That's right," the president says. "I remember now." He sighs with relief. "Good thing you're here every night, Joe."
But suppose, dear reader, that John McCain becomes president and Joe Lieberman doesn't bunk with the McCains on a nightly basis. How easily should the rest of us sleep?...
[T]he al-Qaeda-Iran alliance wasn't just a passing thought.... Whether it was a simple mistake, a neoconservative delusion or a habit of mind that lumps together all of America's enemies (either sincerely or calculatedly, to build public support for military action), we cannot say. What we can say is that the idea of any or all of these options is profoundly disquieting. The very thought of a president who deliberately conflates or erroneously confuses our adversaries with each other is appalling.... We're mired in a war that has its roots in George W. Bush's both imagining and fabricating an alliance between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Do we really want to perpetuate these habits of mind in the next administration?...
[The] prevailing [journalistic] narrative of McCain's national security expertise... [lacks] assessment of the nature of his beliefs... "rogue state rollback"... preventive war... permanent war... missile defense... military unilateralism.... If you liked Bush's foreign and military policy, you'll love McCain's.
But McCain's thinking... remains an undiscovered country to his countrymen.... On economic matters, that may be because he doesn't seem to have devoted much time or energy to thinking about the economy.... Hard to say what's more dangerous -- McCain's approach to the economy or McCain's approach to the world. The thought of him answering the red phone at 3 a.m. fills me with foreboding. Hell, I don't want him answering the red phone at 3 p.m.
Under those circumstances who is to say that Clinton also would be painted into a corner where she choruses, bomb, da bomb, diddity bomb Iran. She's already signed on to Bush's pocket Iran war resolution.
Posted by: christofay | March 26, 2008 at 03:55 PM
Yes, I too have had a nightmare or two about McCain and Lieberman in the White House together.
Posted by: Cynthia | March 26, 2008 at 03:58 PM
Meyerson is giving Lieberman far too much credit. I understand why Lieberman would take steps to help McCain sound like he knows what is going on during the campaign. I do not think Lieberman would take steps to prevent McCain from bombing Iran, erroneously or otherwise.
Posted by: albrt | March 26, 2008 at 04:26 PM
While Brad's criticisms of McCain contain truth, there are a few things to remember:
1) All leaders make mistakes, the one cited isn't very large; twisting some facts on stage. It doesn't compare to the judgment lapse of letting "God Damned America" go for months without counter-comment.
2) McCain only has to know more than Hillary or Obama; Not such a tough thing. It's like the old joke about the bear and the guy putting on sneakers... I only have to outrun you.
3) McCain's advice on military strategy, to move to counter-insurgency early, was very good advice, was eventually taken by Bush, and has had beneficial results.
4) You may not want McCain to answer the phone at 3 AM, but are the others any better?
JF
Posted by: JFred | March 27, 2008 at 04:40 AM
1) It's only the latest of many, many mistakes.
2) McCain has proven that he knows far less than Obama or Clinton
3) Wrong, and so wrong that you should be his VP.
4) Yes. In fact, the margins of this book don't have room to list all of the people who'd be better.
Posted by: Barry | March 27, 2008 at 07:13 AM
Am I the only one with the need for brain bleach after that image.
Posted by: Matthew G. Saroff | March 27, 2008 at 11:09 AM
If there's anything worse than delusion or duplicity it's hot-headed delusion or duplicity. Be afraid, be very afraid.
Posted by: Tuco | March 27, 2008 at 01:16 PM
While JFred is apparently thinking of a Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who live in a parallel universe (and who get their understanding of the world through Fox News and its brethren), it should be pointed out that no U.S. president since Eisenhower has really had adequate foreign policy training before taking office. In part this is because of the country's bad habit of promoting governors straight to the white house, but it also comes from a lack of foreign residency, as opposed to mere window-dressing foreign travel. Much as I hate to propose this, maybe the Constitution should require service abroad in the State Department or CIA as a qualification for being president--something has to be done to prevent future presidents from being as separated from world reality (and consequently easily manipulated) as George W. Bush is and as John McCain is likely to be.
Posted by: andres | March 27, 2008 at 02:11 PM
I suspect St John knows more than he lets on. Not being able to distinguish between Sunni and Shia seems to be a job requirement for Republicans. If a man needs to be misinformed to keep his job, thats usually just what you get.
Posted by: bigTom | March 27, 2008 at 06:07 PM
JF, You are being quite silly in suggesting that Obama has an affirmative responsibility to "counter-comment" to any remarks made by his minister, which is greater than McCain's responsibility to get his basic facts correct regarding the greatest foreign policy question of the moment. If you aim to put that burden on Obama, then you must fairly place the same responsibility on McCain to explain some of the comments made by the wackos he associates with, e.g., pastor John Hagee, whose endorsement he actively sought.
Posted by: tedb | March 27, 2008 at 09:12 PM